Evidence of meeting #8 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was strategy.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:50 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic Policy Branch, Department of the Environment
Sure. We'd be pleased to provide emissions data for Canada as well. We do have that information available. It is published annually, as has been noted.
As well, greening-of-government operations is another of those areas that we're going to be looking at through the specific mitigation measures working group that we've established with the provinces. There will be some additional work going on over the next six months on that, from a federal-provincial perspective, engaging with the sector and with everyone else involved with this as well.
I would note that in the current draft of the federal sustainable development strategy which we have now, we have incorporated the new Canadian target from the Paris summit, which is minus 30% by 2030. So we have a 2030 target for government operations.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
Thank you very much for bringing that up, because it hadn't come up here. We have just recently had those sessions with the premiers and the territorial leaders, and obviously they're working on this as well. How that all dovetails and how we measure our progress is really important. I think it's a great question.
We have our last questioner, Mr. Eglinski.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Jim Eglinski Conservative Yellowhead, AB
I want to follow through with that. Mr. Cullen was going on about this measuring thing. Going back to the idea that you talked about, sociological, economical, and environmental, do we have a level that it has to achieve, the corporation that might be applying for this, or whatever we're dealing with?
Is there a level that they have to reach within government or is it...? Say you don't meet one of those factors, does it stop there and you have to meet the factor, or do you pass it on uphill? Is there any way of measuring? Do any other countries measure a specific line that they have to get to?
12:50 p.m.
Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development
I'm sorry. You mean measuring what, exactly—the environmental effects?
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Jim Eglinski Conservative Yellowhead, AB
Well, if you're looking at the sociological, the environmental, and the economical thing, if it doesn't meet that, does it stop, or does it continue through the program? Are there some countries that have a certain level that it has to reach or it doesn't meet the criteria, and why waste further time on it?
12:50 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, International Institute for Sustainable Development
I will give you one example. There are international standards, for example, the World Bank International Finance Corporation, by which, for any money going out of there at a project level, there's an immediate trigger at 100,000 tonnes that has to be disclosed.
What you're seeing now is that disclosure is now happening on Wall Street, on Bay Street, and in Europe, where private companies are now saying they're going to disclose, and the thresholds are where CSR, corporate social responsibility, reporting is kind of all over the map.
There are specific triggers for GHG emissions, which are embedded through the international standards of IFC.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Jim Eglinski Conservative Yellowhead, AB
Okay, the international standards....
I would like to share the last part of my question with Mr. Fast. I think we have a couple of minutes.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
If I could go to Mr. McKenzie, we didn't finish our discussion, and it's still not clear. Who actually makes the assessment that a certain threshold has been met to trigger this cabinet directive review?
12:50 p.m.
Principal, Office of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development
Thank you for the question.
My understanding is that it's within departments. They have to apply the directive and in so doing, departments develop their own policies and tools internally to determine first.... It's a two-step process, so they'll do a scan to determine whether there will be significant environmental effects, and if they determine that there are, positive or negative, then they will go on and do a more detailed strategic environmental assessment.
It may be worth the committee considering whether there is enough clarity or guidance surrounding that directive, in terms of what is a significant environmental effect, and whether that will trigger a more detailed environmental assessment.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
My question then for Ms. Gelfand and Mr. Godfrey is, would both of you agree that a clearer, more precise definition of that threshold, and baking that into the legislation, would be helpful to the departments as they seek to apply the directive?
March 22nd, 2016 / 12:55 p.m.
Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development
It probably would. I mean, right now the directive is a directive, and it's not linked to the FSDA. They are two separate pieces.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
12:55 p.m.
Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development
You have the act and you have a cabinet directive.
My suggestion was to take the cabinet directive and bake it into the act, so that you have to report; you have to apply the cabinet directive. That was the suggestion that you might want to consider.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
You're suggesting the directive would be expanded to include the social and economic impacts as well.
12:55 p.m.
Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development
Yes, that's exactly it.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
If that's it for questioning, I want to thank our guests very much for joining us today. It has been an enlightening discussion.
I also want to leave it open. If there's anything that came up today that you felt wasn't explored and you didn't get to say what you'd like to have said, we would very much welcome your sharing that with us, through an email, a letter, or however you want to get it to us. We'll make sure that the whole committee gets it. The wealth of experience that you bring to this is very welcome.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
Yes, they're in the blues.
If there is anything that anybody else wants to share with us, we'd welcome it.
12:55 p.m.
As an Individual
My question is, where do you go from here as a committee with regard to—
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Deb Schulte
I think that you've opened the eyes of a lot of people to the possibilities of what we can do with this, and that was the point of today's meeting.
There will be a subcommittee meeting right after this. We'll start the subcommittee at 1:00, and we'll start discussing where we go from here.
Thank you so much. We'll end this session and take a break. The subcommittee will meet at one o'clock.
The meeting is adjourned.